LESLIE RUTLEDGE: The case for confirming Kavanaugh

by
LESLIE RUTLEDGE SPECIAL TO THE DEMOCRAT-GAZETTE
|
September 2, 2018 at 2:01 a.m.
10comments

Very few decisions afforded to the president of the United States have as significant an impact as the nomination of a justice to the Supreme Court. Lifetime appointments mean that justices will likely serve on the Court long after a president leaves the White House, thus ensuring that their judicial philosophy lives on long after their administration.

Following the death of Justice Antonin Scalia, Americans knew that the next president would have at least one Supreme Court appointment, raising the stakes of the election. I am proud to have been an early supporter during President Donald J. Trump’s campaign, having served as a surrogate throughout 2016 and being the only elected official from Arkansas to be a Trump delegate at the Republican National Convention. For me, President Trump was the obvious choice to nominate the next Supreme Court Justice, and he proved himself worthy of that trust when he nominated Justice Neil Gorsuch.

President Trump believes, as I do, that judges must ensure our government does not take actions that violate individual constitutional rights. He promised that if elected he would nominate judges who faithfully interpret and follow the Constitution as written by our founders and not invent constitutional rights by legislating from the bench. And President Trump has fulfilled that promise.

Since he took office, President Trump has nominated outstanding individuals to the courts at every level and at a record pace. President Trump is doing his part to ensure our judiciary is filled with judges who will interpret the law, not invent it.

The president has nominated Judge Brett Kavanaugh to replace retired Justice Anthony Kennedy. I have no doubt that if confirmed to serve on the Supreme Court, Judge Kavanaugh will continue to use his extensive legal education and experience to protect the Constitution.

Judge Kavanaugh has a proven re-

cord from his days on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, the country’s most influential federal court of appeals. One example of his commitment to the rule of law is his dissent in Free Enterprise Fund v. Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, where he argued that shielding PCAOB board members from political accountability violated the president’s Article II powers, and the Supreme Court ultimately adopted Judge Kavanaugh’s approach.

Another example is Judge Kava-

naugh’s dissent in Garza v. Hargan—a case in which I joined a multi-state brief seeking to protect the life of the unborn—where Judge Kavanaugh argued that the federal government cannot be required to facilitate an abortion on demand for an unaccompanied minor.

I am proud to support the nomination of Judge Kavanaugh. He has a proven record of adhering to the Constitution and the rule of law, ensuring that the liber-

ties of all Americans are protected. In the 2016 election, President Trump promised to nominate well-qualified Americans who will faithfully interpret our Constitution as the founders wrote it, and with this nomination, the president has done just that.

The president has made and kept his promises to the American people, now it is time for the U.S. Senate to do the same: confirm Judge Kavanaugh.

Sponsor Content

Comments

He apparently told Sen Susan Collins that he would not overrule Roe v. Wade so he may not be what some Republicans want. I am concerned about his very partisan side and his opinion that the executive branch should be ultra powerful. He is close friends with Justice Roberts who could moderate him a bit. It is hard to be ultraconservative growing up in the D.C. suburbs, but Gorsuch managed to do it.

Kavanaugh would tear down Thomas Jefferson’s “wall of separation between church and state.” He praised jurisprudence that “persuasively criticized” Jefferson’s metaphor of “a strict wall of separation between church and state,” which explains the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment and the divorce between government and religion. Kavanaugh believes that Jefferson’s metaphor, adopted by the Supreme Court since 1878, is “based on bad history,” is “useless as a guide to judging,” and, most alarmingly, that “the wall metaphor was wrong as a matter of law and history.”*In an amicus brief to the Supreme Court for the landmark case Santa Fe Independent School District v. Doe in 2000, Kavanaugh argued that the Supreme Court should allow the machinery of the state, our public schools, to be used to proselytize students. Kavanaugh argued that the school had to provide religious students with a government megaphone that they could use to impose prayer on other students.* Also in that brief, Kavanaugh all but explicitly stated that he would overturn the central test that courts use to strike down violations of state-church separation: The Lemon Test. *Kavanaugh has used “history and tradition” to argue that there should be no real separation between state and church. He’s done so throughout his career, from an early private practice brief arguing for prayer at public school events up through his speech accepting the Supreme Court nomination, when he said he would “interpret the Constitution as written, informed by history and tradition and precedent.” To uphold government endorsements of religion (i.e., violations of the First Amendment), Kavanaugh reaches for history. And often, he gets his history wrong.*Kavanaugh fought to uphold vouchers for private religious schools in Florida. As governor, Jeb Bush instituted a private voucher program that would have sent public money into the coffers of church schools. The Florida Supreme Court struck down the unconstitutional program.*Above information taken from FFRF. About Rutledge's "He has a proven record of adhering to the Constitution and the rule of law, ensuring that the liberties of all Americans are protected.' Hogwash. He is a right wing extremist who will help them to fulfill their political wet dream of tearing down the wall of separation and undoing Roe. v. Wade.*Release his Bush era papers so the American public gets a clear and transparent look at what this illegitimate president and his right wing boot lickers are going to foist upon us.

cal, your final point is the most important to me. Release everything in relation to his prior rationale to decisions he made in the past. We need to see this information in order to form a clearer, and data based understanding of on how he would vote in the future. And why is trump being allowed to make this appt.? This guy could play a pivotal role in decisions affecting trump in the legal arena. Like, can trump be forced to cooperate with a deposition order? Can trump be indicted? Can trump be forced to stand trial? I don't get a chance to choose my own jury, so why should trump?

Rutledge writes, "Following the death of Justice Antonin Scalia, Americans knew that the next president would have at least one Supreme Court Appointment". Americans, knew that the sitting POTUS was to name a Supreme Court Appointment, which he did. However, the Senate refused to even have a hearing, thereby denying that sitting POTUS and that appointee their rights, and not doing the job at hand the Senate was supposed to do. They didn't have to approve the appointee, but he damn sure should have at least had the normal hearings. Rutledge, your statement that I quoted shows you are one of those that will bend the TRUTH, given half a chance. So, don't correct your new kid when he/she lies to you. You deserve it!

Mandatory little statutes of Mother Mary on every car dashboard and a rosary for all school children would not be so bad. More Catholics than protestants so that can be official religion to get America back on track. I was confused on an agenda driven nominee but after the never smiling AG comments here I have made my decision. Besides she a believer in magic & has guns, so who wants black magic put against them or shot. Once we establish a oligarchy we can fix things then.

Hey PopMom (aka the Queen of Wishful Thinking). You heard wrong. Brett Kavanaugh has too much integrity to make such a promise. He’s EXACTLY what consevatives want. He will be confirmed and there’s not a damn thing you lib bedwetters can do about it due to the “Reid Rule”. Not a damn thing.

popmom, I thought it was only the Chief Justice of the supreme court that would make any ultimate decision regarding the president's power.the bench is suppose to interpret the law ONLY not create it. If you are unhappy with the laws of the land take your requests to your congressman.